1. Not upheld

The ASA noted a review of the TiVo box that appeared in The Mirror included the quotation "'This new box leaves Sky+ looking like a relic from a bygone era.' ...", which also appeared in the ad. We noted comparisons with competitors' products should generally be made with the most directly comparable product, which we understood, in the case of the TiVo service, was the Sky+ HD 1TB box. We considered, however, it was clear that the claim "'This new box leaves Sky+ looking like a relic from a bygone era.' ..." was a quotation that formed part of a review and that that was the opinion of the reviewer. We considered it was acceptable to use such a quotation and, in that context, considered the claim was likely to be interpreted as referring to a comparison with Sky+ in general, rather than with a particular Sky+ box. We therefore concluded that the ad was not misleading.

On this point, we investigated ad (a) under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading advertising), 3.33 and 3.34 (Comparisons with identifiable competitors) and 3.47 (Endorsements and testimonials) but did not find it in breach.

2. Not upheld

We noted the claim "Only Virgin Media gives you the freedom to record two shows while watching a third" appeared directly before the text "Or record three shows while you watch something you've recorded earlier ...". We considered the claim was likely to be read in the context of the second sentence, which clearly referred to the different capability TiVo offered for watching recorded shows. In that context, we therefore considered the claim was likely to be interpreted as suggesting other PVR devices did not offer the option of recording two shows while watching a third live programme. We noted the Sky+ HD 1TB device allowed viewers to record two shows while watching a third recorded programme but understood it did not give the option of recording two shows while watching a third live programme. We therefore concluded that the ad was not misleading.

On this point, we investigated ad (b) under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading advertising) and 3.33 (Comparisons with identifiable competitors) but did not find it in breach.

3. Upheld

We noted a review of the TiVo box that appeared in Stuff magazine included the quotation, "A truly next generation PVR that should have Sky shaking in its boots", which also appeared in the ad. In the context of the text "Stuff thinks it's the best way to watch TV. Ever ...", we considered the overall impression of the ad was such that it was likely to be interpreted as suggesting Stuff Magazine ranked the TiVo box ahead of similar Sky products. We noted the later edition of the magazine Virgin submitted stated, in a review headed "1 month with ... VIRGIN MEDIA TiVo", "The Tivo hardware wins out thanks to its three tuners and taste-learning capabilities". However, that was followed by the text "But content is king and Sky has access to so much more HD and 3D for similar cash. If you're a Sky broadband user, you could also get free access to its Anytime+ on-demand goodies". We noted that text appeared under the heading "ALSO CONSIDER ... Sky+ HD 1TB" and that both products were given an equal rating of five stars. In addition, we noted the complainant had submitted a review of the "TOP 10 TV RECEIVERS & RECORDERS", which, we understood, appeared in the February 2011 edition of Stuff magazine, in which the Sky+ HD box was ranked number one. We therefore concluded that the ad misleadingly implied Stuff magazine ranked TiVo ahead of the Sky+ HD 1TB box.

On this point, ad (c) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation), 3.33 and 3.34 (Comparisons with identifiable competitors) and 3.47 (Endorsements and testimonials).